Comments on: Cheap Creation and Magic Tomatoes

By: Mike

Mike — Mon, 29 Jun 2009 15:46:41 +0000

In other words, God used no more power to create the cosmos than
I did. He’s a strcitly non-interventionist kind of Creator.
Have another tomato! These things appear by magic, all by themselves.

By: Steve Evans

Steve Evans — Wed, 24 Jun 2009 14:27:18 +0000

“In fact, it can be mathematically demonstrated that Intelligent Design is a far superior alternative explanation to the random event, natural chaos explanation of the evolution believing crowd.”

bwah haw haw haw

By: Mike

Mike — Wed, 24 Jun 2009 13:28:20 +0000

Your premise is entirely speculation. Did the Lord grow the grapes in the miracle of turning water into wine? Did He heal the sick and the lame by turning to his personal physician and asking for medicine or did He use priesthood power to rapidly return bodies to full health? Did He raise the dead through evolving each individual cell over large quantities of time, from inert, non-living matter to an alert, animated body joined with a spirit, or did it occur instantaneously?
Would an infinitely loving Being have any difficulty whatsoever in loving an instantly organized earth? Or would it take eons for Him to develop feelings of love for His own creation? Why would He create it in the first place if not out of love for His children?
What does evolution have to do with love?
I believe that an intelligent creator left His signature upon His creation, and that that creation did not self-organize nor can it be demonstrated to have arisen entirely by ‘natural selection’. The whole premise of natural selection is just begging to be proven by anyone, anywhere, rather than kept in place by a bunch of wand-waving scientists who believe that life formed magically from dust without a creator or any intelligent direction. Have you thought deeply about the meaning of natural selection? If it were an impartial judge, jury and executioner, then life would have died out long before now. Everything we observe directly in this world works against Dawkin’s improbable, random propositions. Take the thyroid gland as a simple example. It has to have at least three functions to keep the body alive: it has to sense the temperature, it has to tell the body whether to increase or decrease metabolism to match a very narrow range of temperature conducive to life, and it has to know what that narrow range of life-enabling temperatures is so that it can regulate to it. How then, did this process naturally and slowly evolve over large quantities of time when, if it didn’t do its function with precision, the body will die within minutes?
I believe nothing happens without intelligence but your Darwinist friends don’t share your hybrid view of God and naturalism. Nothing happens without planning, effort, and intelligent application of principle. But evolutionists deny all this and claim that every form of life came to be by random chance meetings of the right materials at the right times, with no intervention from God or any other form of intelligent being, over zillions of years (to make their theory seem more plausible) and they go so far as to say that these processes came about and did not have us in mind at all. Is this a loving, caring, philosophy, deeply devoted to our spiritual welfare? No. It is a philosophy of men, kept together by pseudo-scientific peer pressure and virulent anti-theists whose worldview and philosophy is threatened by religion. Darwinists haven’t explored their own ‘science’ sufficiently to take note of its huge weaknesses and gargantuan deficiencies, but I for one, and there are many others, note that it is mathematically impossible to evolve the many different life forms that exist today in the 12-20 billion years that this universe is supposed to have exist. See William Dembski, “No Free Lunch”. In fact, it can be mathematically demonstrated that Intelligent Design is a far superior alternative explanation to the random event, natural chaos explanation of the evolution believing crowd.

By: TaterTot

TaterTot — Sat, 20 Jun 2009 16:15:34 +0000

By: DanielH

DanielH — Fri, 19 Jun 2009 15:53:09 +0000

So could I extrapolate from your comment then that you feel (and I would agree) that it’s a certain level of spiritual maturity to understand that there “tragedies and destinies” and some times it was a person’s time when they die or suffer misfortune, and sometimes it’s just the way of this life on Earth? That sometimes God moves the tornado and sometimes it runs its course? Some cases may be God behind the virus that killed a friend, and other times it’s the roll of the dice of chance? (or current medical knowledge or whatever else?)

By: Homer Simpson

Homer Simpson — Fri, 19 Jun 2009 15:06:47 +0000

DanielH: the threat lies in how much poking and prodding you “allow” God to do. The more you allow, the more the creation simply becomes what creationists say it is: the hand of God in every detail. In fact, any amount of poking and prodding is threatening to scientific explanations because they can’t detect (or find a need for) this “undetectable hand.” (Imagine, if you will, applying for a grant to study the Darwinian evolution of lungs in primitive vertebrates, only to have the reviewers respond with, “We’re sorry, but we have decided that lungs did not arise through evolution but rather through minute divine interventions; you should be studying spleen evolution which, we have decided, did not involve God’s proddings.”)

The less divine prodding you allow, on the other hand, the more you have to deal with events that are not God’s design. That’s fine if you’re talking about red and green butterflies, ’cause they’re just pretty, but how “hands off” are you going to let God be? Is he behind every rainstorm, or just behind hurricanes? Or maybe just certain hurricanes? Did God make bees (which we love, because they pollinate our crops) but not mosquitoes (which are bad because they spread disease)? Was God behind the virus that killed your friend, or was that just rotten Darwinian luck?

By: DanielH

DanielH — Thu, 18 Jun 2009 21:36:43 +0000

What I don’t understand is this:

Why is it so threatening to think that God used his priesthood power (whether by his own hand or that of his servants) to create this beautiful amazing universe we live in, but to do it slowly, to poke, prod, spin galaxies one way and another, create worlds, tinker, enjoy?

I know that I myself enjoy games such as the Sims, SimCity and others, where I can set some ground rules and see what comes of the settings I make.

What is so blasphemous to think that God took time and delight in creation. For me, I have no problem thinking that God’s still playing, making worlds, creating stars and future planets in Orion’s Belt, for instance. Why not? With the omniscience and omnipotence that we believe he has, why is it blasphemous to say:

“Whether God snapped his fingers and made it all just the way it is now, or let it grow under his guidance, it matters not. God did the creation, and glory be to God.”

By: SteveP

SteveP — Wed, 17 Jun 2009 22:21:27 +0000

That’s right S.Faux. Evolution does so much for us: Tomatoes! Everyone, give Darwin a toast, by raising a salsa covered chip, next time you have some.

By: S.Faux

S.Faux — Wed, 17 Jun 2009 22:17:50 +0000

Tomatoes make salsa which makes heaven. This is an unalterable Faux family doctrine.

Oh, by the way, tomatoes have evolved greatly since being domesticated from a Peruvian lineage.

That’s one more check mark for how evolution can be an applied science. It’s NOT JUST theoretical.

By: Homer Simpson

Homer Simpson — Wed, 17 Jun 2009 15:41:13 +0000

Mmmmm….nothing.